It's wonderful and laudable that you read the lectures - however I would say that biodynamics is not to be found there. I can recommend the best book to read about it at the moment - by Peter Selg - and it's called the agricultural course. It's all about the context in which Steiner gave the lectures.
As someone who has studied biodynamic practitioners for the better part of 15 years in wine written apps and served as conference program director of the international by dynamic conference sponsored by Demeter USA I can say the practitioners are the best source of information. I have interviewed many of them. One of the best is Jean Michel Comme.
It is also worth noting that the most of newest regenerative organic wineries are or were also certified Biodynamic - Tablas, Troon and Grgich Hills are good examples as well as Caine Thompson at Robert Hall whose research with Agrology sensors studied not just ROC but biodynamic practices. Thompson previously ran a biodynamic winery in New Zealand.
Secondly, I would say there is notable study conducted by two wine economics professors found that organically grown wines averaged six points higher in scores and biodynamic wines 12 points higher. This was in a study of 128,000 wine reviews over a 20 year period in various French wine publications. https://www.winebusiness.com/news/article/241973
Currently, experts are all looking to soil biology for more insights on better farming. Researchers today are most excitedly focused on enlivening and supporting the biological activity and soils rather than suppressing that with chemicals.
Researchers have found French viticultural textbooks from the 1800s that mention some of what we today call the biodynamic preps. So these were not created by Steiner.
Anthroposophy and biodynamics have become two different lanes in the eyes of all the wineries I've spoken with and there has been considerable tension in the biodynamic community for a long time that falls out along the lines between Wine and Food.
Steiner was not an advocate of wine - in fact, he thought it was detrimental to personal spiritual growth so it is ironic of course that many have come to appreciate biodynamics through wine.
One scientist in France is carrying on the most interesting biodynamic research in wine. His name is Lionel Ranjard and I recommend following him on LinkedIn. He is with the French government agricultural agency and based in Burgundy. To date, his research has shown enormous benefit from biodynamic practices in soil health as compared to conventional or organic soils.
It's great to continue to explore authentic sources of information about biodynamics as it represents what we now tend to call traditional ecological knowledge...a frontier for all.
I want to hugely support you in looking at primary sources and stopping the incredible amount of BS on what we call biodynamics today. We have a great bench of practitioners who can contribute their knowledge and should be given their due for decades of their experience. I am talking Paulo Bea, Romanee Conti, Beaucastel, Porter Creek, Brick House and so many more. Ask the vintners and the wine growers.
In conclusion a quote:
"English wine critic Jancis Robinson has said publicly that she can taste when a wine is biodynamic. Robert Parker has said biodynamic wines taste better. And French wine importer Kermit Lynch (who owns a vineyard in France) said he could taste the difference between conventional and biodynamic grapes. Until now, many considered such statements to be purely subjective."
Thanks, Pam. I am aware of many of your sources and references, but some are new to me. I’ll look at them. Biodynamics has evolved since Steiner, but I wanted to read (albeit in translation) the source material.
The spiritual aspects of the practice, and the anecdotal nature of arguments in favor, are highly troubling, but I’m persuaded by results that can be agreed through peer-reviewed science.
Steiner's leadership in a spiritual movement ignited an ag movement that has had ongoing tensions between the spiritual faction and the more agronomic faction. I think the agronomic value of the preps should not be underestimated and should be seen in the context of the regenerative organic movement and the work of Agrology, John Kempf et al as a search for a better way of farming with higher nutrient density and often greater or more flavorful yields.
The calendar was not part of the lectures and is an independent thread for instance.
The goal of peer reviewed science is often hurt by the widespread b s spread among wine writers.
But Ranjard is really on to something. German research at Geisenheim has also found benefits, esp in drought years.
It's wonderful and laudable that you read the lectures - however I would say that biodynamics is not to be found there. I can recommend the best book to read about it at the moment - by Peter Selg - and it's called the agricultural course. It's all about the context in which Steiner gave the lectures.
As someone who has studied biodynamic practitioners for the better part of 15 years in wine written apps and served as conference program director of the international by dynamic conference sponsored by Demeter USA I can say the practitioners are the best source of information. I have interviewed many of them. One of the best is Jean Michel Comme.
It is also worth noting that the most of newest regenerative organic wineries are or were also certified Biodynamic - Tablas, Troon and Grgich Hills are good examples as well as Caine Thompson at Robert Hall whose research with Agrology sensors studied not just ROC but biodynamic practices. Thompson previously ran a biodynamic winery in New Zealand.
Secondly, I would say there is notable study conducted by two wine economics professors found that organically grown wines averaged six points higher in scores and biodynamic wines 12 points higher. This was in a study of 128,000 wine reviews over a 20 year period in various French wine publications. https://www.winebusiness.com/news/article/241973
Currently, experts are all looking to soil biology for more insights on better farming. Researchers today are most excitedly focused on enlivening and supporting the biological activity and soils rather than suppressing that with chemicals.
Researchers have found French viticultural textbooks from the 1800s that mention some of what we today call the biodynamic preps. So these were not created by Steiner.
Anthroposophy and biodynamics have become two different lanes in the eyes of all the wineries I've spoken with and there has been considerable tension in the biodynamic community for a long time that falls out along the lines between Wine and Food.
Steiner was not an advocate of wine - in fact, he thought it was detrimental to personal spiritual growth so it is ironic of course that many have come to appreciate biodynamics through wine.
One scientist in France is carrying on the most interesting biodynamic research in wine. His name is Lionel Ranjard and I recommend following him on LinkedIn. He is with the French government agricultural agency and based in Burgundy. To date, his research has shown enormous benefit from biodynamic practices in soil health as compared to conventional or organic soils.
It's great to continue to explore authentic sources of information about biodynamics as it represents what we now tend to call traditional ecological knowledge...a frontier for all.
I want to hugely support you in looking at primary sources and stopping the incredible amount of BS on what we call biodynamics today. We have a great bench of practitioners who can contribute their knowledge and should be given their due for decades of their experience. I am talking Paulo Bea, Romanee Conti, Beaucastel, Porter Creek, Brick House and so many more. Ask the vintners and the wine growers.
In conclusion a quote:
"English wine critic Jancis Robinson has said publicly that she can taste when a wine is biodynamic. Robert Parker has said biodynamic wines taste better. And French wine importer Kermit Lynch (who owns a vineyard in France) said he could taste the difference between conventional and biodynamic grapes. Until now, many considered such statements to be purely subjective."
It's time to dive in a little deeper.
https://winecountrygeographic.blogspot.com/2024/03/yields-yields-yields-organic-and.html?m=1
Thanks, Pam. I am aware of many of your sources and references, but some are new to me. I’ll look at them. Biodynamics has evolved since Steiner, but I wanted to read (albeit in translation) the source material.
The spiritual aspects of the practice, and the anecdotal nature of arguments in favor, are highly troubling, but I’m persuaded by results that can be agreed through peer-reviewed science.
Steiner's leadership in a spiritual movement ignited an ag movement that has had ongoing tensions between the spiritual faction and the more agronomic faction. I think the agronomic value of the preps should not be underestimated and should be seen in the context of the regenerative organic movement and the work of Agrology, John Kempf et al as a search for a better way of farming with higher nutrient density and often greater or more flavorful yields.
The calendar was not part of the lectures and is an independent thread for instance.
The goal of peer reviewed science is often hurt by the widespread b s spread among wine writers.
But Ranjard is really on to something. German research at Geisenheim has also found benefits, esp in drought years.
Every time I think I cannot be more impressed with Tablas Creek they go and do something that impresses me even more.
Exactly!